Think about it; the Nikon is more versatile in that it can use two different types of flash card - one of which is much faster than CF. And you can buy the cards with the money you save on the purchase price difference between the two cameras. Win-win.

Ummm, no. 1dx has a shorted battery life and a faster burst rate.http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos1dx&products=nikon_d4&sortDir=ascending & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6yG7nAk7ZI

Toliy

(1:44 PM, February 06, 2014)

I will have to agree that the 1DX is better then D4. But the Canon is not half the price, actually $800 more then the Nikon.

Also Scott Kelby switched because Canon sponsored him and gave him the gear at no cost.

Both cameras are great, but when it comes to a comparison NO WAY to prove that the D4 is better than the 1D X !1D X is much better in almost every thing (specially the less shutter lag, amazing focusing system, higher image resolution AND with almost half the price of the D4).Do you know that Scott Kelby switched from Nikon to Canon because of the 1D X ?

Both cameras are great. Nikon has definitely better AF in low light where hunts much less than Canon. When light is ok then both works perfect. Personaly i like Nikon ergonomy. They only made a mistake with mixing two diferent type of slots XQD+CF, they should apply two CF slots. Resolution doesn't matter, 2 fps more in Canon also doesn't really rule ...What makes me angry about D4 is different battery than D3s which had compatible EN-EL4a with D700 and D300 ... so now carrying two chargers? Eghh..!

Quazi, the one specialist that lost ground from the 1Ds mkIII to the Canon 1D X is the wildlife photographer. AF is limited (via firmware) to lenses reporting a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or wider on the 1D X. It was f/8.0 on the 1DIII. Which means many lens/extender combinations that were able to use AF on the 1D III won't be able to use AF mounted on the 1D X. And the reduction of 3MP in total resolution means there is less room to crop for extra reach. This seems to be an arbitrary decision by Canon to force serious photographers to purchase lenses such as the EF 600mm f/4L II for $13K when the the EF 300mm f/4L + EF 2X III for about $1.8K would do in bright daylight for 1/7th the price.

As for the 7D, I've probably shot 20,000+ frames in the last 8 months with mine. Not a single exposure was taken in "Auto" mode. Most were split between P & Tv (1/3), Av (1/3), or M (1/3). Not a single exposure was taken using the LCD instead of the viewfinder. The 7D is a good tool for what it was designed to do, handle fast for action (and even faster with the recent firmware update) even in low light at a price a fraction of the 1D series. Just because many people purchase a tool and don't use it in a way that maximizes its capabilities doesn't mean the tool is pathetic.

I HAVE used the LCD screen to manually focus on my tripod mounted FF body before switching off the Live view and using remote release/mirror lockup for long exposures in low light. I guess that makes me a pathetic P&S user turned DSLR shooter in your eyes.